Michael Savage calls for "nationalist party" with a "charismatic leader"; globalists respond
Speaking on the Aaron Klein radio show earlier today, radio host Michael Savage said among other things this:
"We need a nationalist party in the United States of America... [the Tea Partiers] need to restructure their party. They need a charismatic leader, which they don’t have... When you say Tea Party no one knows who the leader is because there is no leader,” he said. “No man has stepped forward who can lead that party."
1. There are different types of nationalism, and leading figures raising issues with Savage's comments are counting on you not knowing about that. The "charismatic leader" part sounds funny, and those leading figures are trying to activate the "that sounds funny" response in people. Those hacks want you to think Savage is proposing some sort of Nazi party, when - as should be obvious - that's not at all the case. Some types of nationalism don't involve racial or national supremacy. You can start here. Bear in mind that those leading figures raising issues with the quote above are counting on you not knowing that.
2. You can read a summary of Savage's take on nationalism here. Go read that, and then compare it to the impression that some are trying to give you.
3. On Twitter, those leading the charge against Savage's comments include "liberals" such as Matt Yglesias, Ben Smith, and Alec MacGillis of The New Republic. And, the reason they're doing that is because the establishment supports globalism, and Savage's comments stand in opposition to the monetary interests of the elites. If those three or others in the same position came out against globalization, they'd soon find themselves out of a job. Over the past few decades, U.S. elites have sold out their country, sending jobs abroad to profit. If our elites had been nationalists instead of globalists, we might still have functioning industries that are now located in China. Those like Yglesias, Smith, and MacGillis are on their side, not yours.
4. Both the Democratic Party and to some extent the GOP support a form of nationalism: ethnic nationalism. Not of whites, but of non-whites. For just one of the very many examples that could be provided, see Bill Richardson or George P Bush.
5. The Tea Parties are already nationalists of a sort: they're red state yahoo nationalists who'd be perfectly happy to be their own country (until they missed the money that blue states give to underwrite most red states). Their leaders - such as the Koch family - support free trade and other global initiatives (the Kochs were a leading force behind NAFTA). The idea that the Tea Partiers would support a beneficial form of nationalism for the whole U.S. is absurd; they've shown that they aren't American patriots by continually turning their backs on their fellow citizens.